Meeting documents

2001/1645/CH

Case Officer:      Iwan Jones

Date Received:     01/10/01     Decide by Date:     25/11/01

Parish:     Penn     Ward:     Penn

App Type:     Full application

Applicant:      MR P TILLING

SITE CONSTRAINTS

Penn & Tylers Green Conservation Area

Established Residential Area of Special Character - Local Plan Policy H4

Class B Road

Area of Special Advertisement Control

Archaeological site

Affects setting of Grade II Listed Building

THE APPLICATION

The application relates to the erection of a single storey symmetrical extension to each property measuring 3.8m wide, 2.25m deep and to a lean-to roof height of 3m. Symmetrical porches are also proposed to the front measuring 1.1m deep, 1.4m wide and to a height of 2.8m. All materials would match or be similar to those on the existing dwelling.

PARISH COUNCIL

No comment.

CONSULTATIONS

Historic Buildings Officer: The cottages are not listed, and the development has no effect on the setting of April Cottage, listed Grade II, next door. No objections from listed building aspect. Development does lie within Conservation Area and will involve the demolition of two small sheds. One of these, to the rear of the cottages on the right-hand side, is an insignificant timber building, but the other, to the left-hand side, is an older brick building that may originally have served in part as a privy. This brick shed forms part of a pleasing view across the garden of the adjacent Red Lion Public House. In ideal terms this small building should be preserved for its contribution to the Conservation Area, but it is evident that it is very much in the way of any extension to the cottages, and that the cottages are very small. The sacrifice of the shed is probably justified on balance in order to retain the cottages as a distinct pair but viable in terms of modern accommodation.

County Archaeological Officer: The application lies within the medieval and post-medieval pottery and tile manufacturing village of Penn. Decorated medieval floor tiles have been found close to this site indicating that the remains of a production site or buildings using decorated tiles or associated with the industry can be anticipated in this area. PPG16 states that the desirability of preserving important archaeological remains is a material planning consideration and that, where physical preservation is not feasible, planning authorities need to satisfy themselves that the developer has made appropriate and satisfactory arrangements for their excavation, recording and subsequent publication. This advice is reflected in Bucks County Structure Plan and the Local Plan. In this case, bearing in mind the small-scale of the proposed development, we would request that, in line with the advice in PPG16 paragraph 30, any consent granted should be subject to condition. The archaeological investigation should take the form of a watching brief and be undertaken by a professionally qualified archaeologist working to a brief issued by ourselves.

County Highways Engineer: The creation of an access in this location will reduce the opportunity for on-street parking, which in turn should improve access to the adjoining cottages. Although the level of visibility at the new access will be restricted, this will not be any different to that available on a number of the surrounding houses. Given that traffic levels are very light and vehicle speeds are generally low in this area, I do not consider that a highway reason for refusal would be sustained on appeal. No objection raised on highway grounds to the proposal. Given that there are no alterations proposed within highway limits, no conditions recommended.

POLICIES

The Adopted Chiltern District Local Plan - 1997 (including The Adopted Alterations May 2001): Policies GC1, GC3, H4, H14, H15, LB2, CA1, CA2, TR2, TR11, TR16, and AS2.

ISSUES

1.     The application site is located within an Established Residential Area of Special Character and within a Conservation Area where there are no objections in principle to the proposed development subject to compliance with the relevant local plan policies.

2.     The amenities of each property as well as those of neighbouring properties would be maintained. No objection raised in relation to Policies GC3 and H14.

3.     The scale, height and design of the proposal is considered acceptable. No objection raised in relation to Policies GC1 and H15.

4.     The Historic Buildings Officer’s comments are noted where it is considered that no effect would be had upon the setting of the neighbouring Grade II listed building. The extensions proposed would retain the cottages as a distinct pair and would not affect the character and appearance of the Conservation Area. No objection raised in relation to Policies LB2, CA1 and CA2.  

5.     The Highway Engineer’s comments are noted where no objection is raised to the proposal on highway grounds. Compliance is therefore achieved with Policies TR2, TR11 and TR16.  

6.     The following recommendation is made having regard to the above and also to the content of the Human Rights Act 1998.

RECOMMENDATION: Conditional permission

Subject to the following conditions

(1) C108 General Time Limit

(2) C432 Materials - As on Plan or Subsequently Specified

(3) No development shall take place until the applicant, or their agents or successors in title, have secured the implementation of a programme of archaeological work in accordance with a written scheme of investigation which has been previously submitted by the applicant and approved by the Local Planning Authority.

Reason: To ensure the safe excavation, recording and subsequent publication of any remains of the medieval and post-medieval pottery and tile manufacturing industry associated with the area.

(1) INFORMATIVE - You are advised that the archaeological investigation should take the form of a watching brief and be undertaken by a professionally qualified archaeologist working to a brief issued by Bucks County Council.

2001/1723/CH

Case Officer:      Geoffrey Hugall

Date Received:     16/10/01     Decide by Date:     10/12/01

Parish:     Chalfont St Giles     Ward:     Chalfont St Giles

App Type:     Full application

Applicant:      MS T GAZELEY

SITE CONSTRAINTS

Built-up area other than Local Plan Policy  H2 or H4

Unclassified road

Mineral Consultation Area

RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY

THE APPLICATION

The proposed single storey side extension is to replace the existing garage.  The proposed extension is to be 3.085m in width and 5.75m in depth.  Over this and the remainder of the dwelling a replacement roof is proposed.  The ridge height of which would be approximately 6.5m (when viewed from the front elevation – due to a change in ground levels), the ridge would run, at right-angles to the road, to the rear for a distance of approximately 7m at which point it becomes the roof over the proposed rear dormer window.  This rear dormer would have a curved window and would be 3m in width, while the smaller dormer window to serve the proposed dressing room would be 1.4m in width and a height of approximately 1.4m.  The dormer window in the front elevation would be 1.4m in width, 1.2m in height to its eaves with a pitched roof over adding a further 1m.  The pitched and hipped roof over the side extension would be approximately 5.25m to its ridge.

PARISH COUNCIL

No objections.

REPRESENTATIONS

Two letters of objection from both neighbouring properties which could be summarised as follows –

1.     Overlooking from rear dormer window to neighbouring properties – giving a clear unobstructed view.

2.     Should the Velux window in the eastern elevation be openable then there is a direct view into the bedroom of the neighbouring property resulting in a loss of privacy.

3.     Loss of light due to the increased ridge height.

POLICIES

The Adopted Chiltern District Local Plan - 1997 (including The Adopted Alterations May 2001): Policies GC1, GC3, H13, H14, H15, H16, H18, TR11 and TR16.

ISSUES

1.     The design of the extensions is considered acceptable and no objections are raised with regard to its impact upon the street scene.  In this respect the comments of the Inspector (in connection with 93/1423/CH) and the Officers report of 94/1016/CH are noted.  Having regard to the large front dormer at No.42 and the requirements of Policy H18, no objections are raised over the design of the front dormer window.  Although large, the rear dormer would not be intrusive in the context of the street scene and as such no objections are raised to its design.

2.     As with the previous application (01/1357/CH), it is considered that the main issue is the impact the extensions would have upon the neighbouring properties, in this context the representations from the neighbouring properties have been given due consideration.  It is also noted that the Inspector, when considering application 93/1423/CH, considered that the proposed rear gable ended roof extension would appear unacceptably overbearing in relation to the gardens of the neighbouring properties, it should be noted that the 1993 application did not propose any roof extension over the existing garage.   However, having due regard to the Inspector’s comments and to the subsequent approval (ref. – 94/1016/CH), it is not considered that the current scheme would be excessively overbearing to the neighbouring properties.  In this respect it is noted that no objections were raised to this aspect in the previous application (01/1357/CH).

3.     The previous application was refused due to the unacceptable level of overlooking that would be permitted to the neighbouring properties.  It was considered that the extent of and curved nature of the rear dormer window would potentially permit a relatively clear view over the neighbouring properties, this was not considered to be acceptable and is considered to be contrary to Polices in the Local Plan aimed at protecting the privacy and amenities of the neighbouring residents.  The revised scheme has amended the window design of this rear dormer window.  Having due regard to the comments of the neighbouring residents, it is considered that the amendments are sufficient to overcome the previous reason for refusal.  It is now considered that the predominant view from this window would be to the rear and any overlooking to the neighbouring properties would be at relatively acute angles, as such this should not result in an unacceptable level of overlooking over and above what would be provided from a more conventional dormer window.

4.     The gross floorspace of the existing dwelling is fractionally below 120m2, it is also noted that the existing garage is to be replaced with living accommodation.   Notwithstanding the above, it is considered that there are no objections under Polices TR11 and TR16 as two cars could be parked in line in front of the proposed single storey extension and there is also sufficient space in front of the dwelling to provide a further space if necessary.

5.     The following recommendation is made having regard to the above and also to the content of the Human Rights Act 1998.

RECOMMENDATION: Conditional permission

Subject to the following conditions

(1) C108 General Time Limit

(2) C431 Materials of Development to Match Those of Existing Building

(3) Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 1995 (or any Order revoking or re-enacting that Order, with or without modification), no windows  / dormer windows / rooflights other than those expressely authorised by this permission, or as subsequently agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority, shall be inserted, constructed or enlarged at any time in the extension and replacement roof hereby permitted.

Reason: To protect the amenities and privacy of the adjoining properties.

(4) The rooflights in the eastern and western elevations of the replacement roof hereby approved shall not be glazed other than with obscured glass at any time.  Furthermore the rooflight in the eastern elevation shall be permanently fixed shut.

Reason: In order to protect the amenities and privacy of the adjoining properties.

(5) C202 Garage/Parking Space (for extension) - Plans to be Approved

2001/1753/CH

Case Officer:      Keith Musgrave

Date Received:     22/10/01     Decide by Date:     16/12/01

Parish:     Chalfont St Peter     Ward:     Chalfont St Peter Central

App Type:     Application for work to tree(s) covered by a Tree Preservation Order

Applicant:      MR AND MRS J D PEGLER

SITE CONSTRAINTS

Established Residential Area of Special Character - Local Plan Policy H4

Unclassified road

Tree Preservation Order

Mineral Consultation Area

RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY

The Chiltern District Council (Land at Greenhedges, Lincoln Road, Chalfont St Peter) Tree Preservation Order 1992 (No 15 of 1992) covering two individual beech tree at what is now Melbury House.

The Chiltern District Council (Land at former Greenhedges, Lincoln Road, Chalfont St Peter) Tree Preservation Order 1995 (No 9 of 1995) covering an individual cedar tree at what is now Melbury House.

95/0478/CH     Demolition of dwelling and erection of detached house with integral garage served by vehicular access off Lincoln Road. Conditional permission.

01/1754/CH     Crown reduction of a beech tree. Not yet determined.

01/1755/CH     Crown reduction of a beech tree. Not yet determined.

THE APPLICATION

Crown reduction of a cedar tree by 25%.

PARISH COUNCIL

Would accept Forestry Officer’s recommendation.

REPRESENTATIONS

Applicant:     Reason for proposed work is proximity to house and light.

CONSULTATIONS

District Forestry and Landscape Adviser:     Cedar about 15m high in rear garden of property – in sloping rear garden about 7m from house and at level about 2m above house – some deadwood present – uneven growth on crown – some minor balancing and reduction would be acceptable but severe reduction would damage shape of tree.

POLICIES

The Adopted Chiltern District Local Plan – 1997: Policy TW2 

ISSUES

1.     The cedar tree is situated in the rear garden of the property but it is partially visible from the surrounding roads.

2.     The tree is in a fairly dominant position in the rear garden so some minor balancing and reduction would be acceptable but more major work could damage the shape of the tree.

3.     The following recommendation is made having regard to the above and also to the content of the Human Rights Act 1998.

RECOMMENDATION: Conditional permission

Subject to the following conditions

(1) C109 Time Limit for Consent under Tree Preservation Order

(2) The tree surgery hereby approved shall not exceed crown reduction and re-shaping by 20%.

Reason: In order to maintain, as far as possible, the amenity value of the tree and the special character of the area which were the reasons for the making of the Tree Preservation Order.

(1) INFORMATIVE -  I160 Trees - Tree works to British Standard                                     

(2) INFORMATIVE - I212 Tree Work - Crown Reduction                                                 

2001/1754/CH

Case Officer:      Keith Musgrave

Date Received:     22/10/01     Decide by Date:     16/12/01

Parish:     Chalfont St Peter     Ward:     Chalfont St Peter Central

App Type:     Application for work to tree(s) covered by a Tree Preservation Order

Applicant:       MR AND MRS J D PEGLER

SITE CONSTRAINTS

Established Residential Area of Special Character - Local Plan Policy H4

Unclassified road

Tree Preservation Order

Mineral Consultation Area

RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY

The Chiltern District Council (Land at Greenhedges, Lincoln Road, Chalfont St Peter) Tree Preservation Order 1992 (No 15 of 1992) covering two individual beech tree at what is now Melbury House.

The Chiltern District Council (Land at former Greenhedges, Lincoln Road, Chalfont St Peter) Tree Preservation Order 1995 (No 9 of 1995) covering an individual cedar tree at what is now Melbury House.

95/0478/CH     Demolition of dwelling and erection of detached house with integral garage served by vehicular access off Lincoln Road. Conditional permission.

01/1753/CH     Crown reduction of a cedar tree. Not yet determined.

01/1755/CH     Crown reduction of a beech tree. Not yet determined.

THE APPLICATION

Crown reduction of a beech tree by 25%.

PARISH COUNCIL

Would accept Forestry Officer’s recommendation.

REPRESENTATIONS

Applicant:     Reason for proposed work is telephone cable and light.

CONSULTATIONS

District Forestry and Landscape Adviser:     Two beech trees in front garden – one on front boundary and one on side boundary with Cedar Heights – application involves tree on front - about 15m high – signs of previous reduction –close to nearby sycamore - some reduction and re-shaping considered reasonable.

POLICIES

The Adopted Chiltern District Local Plan – 1997: Policy TW2 

ISSUES

1.     The beech tree is situated on the front boundary of the property and it is prominent in views from the road.

2.     There has been previous crown reduction to the tree and some further work is considered to be reasonable management.

3.     The following recommendation is made having regard to the above and also to the content of the Human Rights Act 1998.

RECOMMENDATION: Conditional permission

Subject to the following conditions

(1) C109 Time Limit for Consent under Tree Preservation Order

(2) The tree surgery hereby approved shall not exceed crown reduction and re-shaping by 25%.

Reason: In order to maintain, as far as possible, the amenity value of the tree and the special character of the area which were the reasons for the making of the Tree Preservation Order.

(1) INFORMATIVE -  I160 Trees - Tree works to British Standard                                     

(2) INFORMATIVE - I212 Tree Work - Crown Reduction                                                 

2001/1755/CH

Case Officer:      Keith Musgrave

Date Received:     22/10/01     Decide by Date:     16/12/01

Parish:     Chalfont St Peter     Ward:     Chalfont St Peter Central

App Type:     Application for work to tree(s) covered by a Tree Preservation Order

Applicant:      MR AND MRS J D PEGLER

SITE CONSTRAINTS

Established Residential Area of Special Character - Local Plan Policy H4

Unclassified road

Tree Preservation Order

Mineral Consultation Area

RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY

The Chiltern District Council (Land at Greenhedges, Lincoln Road, Chalfont St Peter) Tree Preservation Order 1992 (No 15 of 1992) covering two individual beech tree at what is now Melbury House.

The Chiltern District Council (Land at former Greenhedges, Lincoln Road, Chalfont St Peter) Tree Preservation Order 1995 (No 9 of 1995) covering an individual cedar tree at what is now Melbury House.

95/0478/CH     Demolition of dwelling and erection of detached house with integral garage served by vehicular access off Lincoln Road. Conditional permission.

01/1753/CH     Crown reduction of a cedar tree. Not yet determined.

01/1754/CH     Crown reduction of a beech tree. Not yet determined.

THE APPLICATION

Crown reduction of a beech tree by 25%.

PARISH COUNCIL

Would accept Forestry Officer’s recommendation.

REPRESENTATIONS

Applicant:     Reason for proposed work is proximity to house and light.

CONSULTATIONS

District Forestry and Landscape Adviser:     Two beech trees in front garden – one on front boundary and one on side boundary with Cedar Heights – application involves tree on side boundary - about 15m high – signs of previous reduction – some reduction and re-shaping considered reasonable.

POLICIES

The Adopted Chiltern District Local Plan – 1997: Policy TW2 

ISSUES

1.     The beech tree is situated on the side boundary of the front garden of the property and it is visible in views from the road.

2.     There has been previous crown reduction to the tree and some further work is considered to be reasonable management.

3.     The following recommendation is made having regard to the above and also to the content of the Human Rights Act 1998.

RECOMMENDATION: Conditional permission

Subject to the following conditions

(1) C109 Time Limit for Consent under Tree Preservation Order

(2) The tree surgery hereby approved shall not exceed crown reduction and re-shaping by 25%.

Reason: In order to maintain, as far as possible, the amenity value of the tree and the special character of the area which were the reasons for the making of the Tree Preservation Order.

(1) INFORMATIVE -  I160 Trees - Tree works to British Standard                                     

(2) INFORMATIVE - I212 Tree Work - Crown Reduction                                                 

2001/1756/CH

Case Officer:      Geoffrey Hugall

Date Received:     22/10/01     Decide by Date:     16/12/01

Parish:     Chalfont St Peter     Ward:     Chalfont Common

App Type:     Full application

Applicant:      MR AND MRS CALLAGHAN

SITE CONSTRAINTS

Built-up area other than Local Plan Policy  H2 or H4

Adjoining Green Belt

Class C Road

Unclassified road

Mineral Consultation Area

RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY

AM/305/61     House and garage.

CH/739/79     Construction of one flat over the garage, refused.

THE APPLICATION

1.     The single storey extension on the north-eastern elevation of the dwelling would involve the removal of the existing garage, this structure would be replaced with a structure that would project 5m beyond the flank elevation of the existing dwelling and would be up to 6.4m in depth, the front elevation of the extension would be 4.95m behind the main front elevation, the glazed area of the conservatory would be approximately 1.1m behind the main front elevation.  It would have a pitched roof over to a ridge height of 4.9m, to the rear the ‘conservatory’ part would have a ridge height of 4.2m.  

2.     The two-storey extension on the south-western elevation would be 5.5m in width at the front elevation, stepping in to 4.4m at the rear.  It would project 1.1m in front of the adjoining part of the main dwelling and would be 1.2m in from the corresponding rear elevation.  The eaves height at the front and rear elevation would be approximately 4.9m and for the most part the eaves on the flank elevation would be 3.9m.  The highest point of this part of the proposal would be its 8m ridge height.

PARISH COUNCIL

No objection.

REPRESENTATIONS

Letter from neighbour at 65 Foxdell Way strongly objecting on the following grounds which could be summarised as -

1.     We have lived here for 16 years and were attracted to the road by its open layout with good views, space between the properties with the privacy that affords.  The proposed two-storey extension would greatly affect those aims.  The physical intrusion and loss of privacy would have a massive impact upon our property and our daily lives.

2.     Our house is the only one in the whole of Foxdell Way that has its main entrance at the side of the property...facing No.69.  The distance between our front door and the boundary is 6.7m.  The existing space between our two properties lets in ample daylight through our front door in the hallway, our front door deliberately has a high percentage of glass surface area to accommodate this.  There is sufficient distance between us for the sky and other properties further up the road to be clearly visible through the glass.  The extension would obliterate this view and the amount of light entering the house on the ground floor would be greatly reduced.  If the application was approved it would mean a two-storey brick wall would stare at us through our glass front door 25 feet away.

3.     The view and light from upstairs would be similarly affected.  Our main bedroom window faces both the rear and the side of the house and daylight enters via two windows, one 92’’ wide facing the rear, the other 70’’ wide facing the side directly at No.69.

4.     Our rear garden is stepped and therefore the main grass area is substantially higher than the level next door at No.69.  This affords views between the two properties.  A two-storey extension would obliterate that view and would look directly over and into our back garden in the vicinity of a patio area.

5.     Would have no objections to a two-storey extension on the opposite side of the house.  The extension as planned would alter this existing style closing us in unreasonably and unfairly.

6.     Damage to the tree on the boundary between properties, its loss would exacerbate the impact.

CONSULTATIONS

District Engineer (Highways) – No objections subject to conditions.

POLICIES

The Adopted Chiltern District Local Plan - 1997 (including The Adopted Alterations May 2001): Policies GC1, GC3, H11, H13, H14, H15, H16, H17, TR11 and TR16.

ISSUES

1.     The application site is located within the built up area of Chalfont St. Peter wherein applications to extend residential dwellings are acceptable in principle subject, among others, to matters regarding its impact upon the character of the area and the amenities of neighbouring properties being in accordance with the relevant Local Plan Policies.

2.     Taking firstly the design of the proposal, although substantial the extensions are not considered to appear unduly intrusive in the overall character of the area.  The single storey extension on the north-eastern elevation is relatively unobtrusive and would replace an existing garage.  The two-storey side extension has been designed so as to maintain the minimum 1m distance to the boundary required under Policies H11 and H16, as the area is not considered to be characterised by spacious layouts, it is considered that the 1m provided is sufficient in this instance.  In all it is not considered that the proposal is contrary to Policies GC1, H13(ii), H15, H16 & H17.

3.     Having regard to the representations of the neighbour it is considered that the main issue is the impact upon their amenities from the two-storey side extension.  Concerns relating to increased overlooking are noted, it is however, important to note that the window at the rear of this extension are to an en-suite bathroom and to the garage.  As such, it is considered reasonable to require that the first floor window, which could potentially permit more overlooking, be fitted with obscure glazing.  Although the comments regarding the loss of views are noted, it is generally accepted that there is no private right to a view that the planning system should protect.  It remains therefore to consider the impact the extension would have upon the dwelling itself, noting the positioning of the windows and door on that elevation.  In this respect it is important to note that the elevation of No.65 in question faces in a north to north-easterly direction and would not therefore receive direct sunlight during much of the day.  It is also important to note that the openings are to the hall and to a side window to the master bedroom.  As the proposed extension would undoubtedly have an impact upon the neighbouring dwelling, it has to be considered whether the impact would be so significant so as to justify refusing the application.  Given the orientation of the dwellings, the fact that the hallway is not generally considered to be a habitable room while the window to the main bedroom is (in size) secondary to the main rearward facing window, that the much of the extension would be viewed against the backdrop of the existing dwelling (albeit 5.5m closer) and that there would be a distance of over 7m between respective flank elevations which are themselves splayed away from each other, it is not considered that the extension would be so significantly adverse in terms of its impact upon the neighbour that a refusal would be justified.

4.     No objections are raised under Policies TR11 and TR16, sufficient car parking provision is available within the site to comply with standards.

5.     The following recommendation is made having regard to the above and also to the content of the Human Rights Act 1998.

RECOMMENDATION: Conditional permission

Subject to the following conditions

(1) C108 General Time Limit

(9) C556 Close access in one month; reinstate verge, footway & kerb after cons DS

(2) C431 Materials of Development to Match Those of Existing Building

(3) C174A No additional windows in SW elevation of two-storey extension.

(4) C178 Obscure glass in first floor window in SE elevation of two-storey extension

(5) C501 Access Layout - Adopted Road : Access to new Dev - Plan Approved

(6) C542 Gradient of Access not to exceed 1:20 for first 5m, & 1:10 thereafter

(7) C561 Surface Water

(8) C454 Garaging/Parking as specified on plans  received on 22/10/01

(1) INFORMATIVE - I253 Need to obtain licence from Local Highway Authority to carry out work       

2001/1759/CH

Case Officer:      Iwan Jones

Date Received:     23/10/01     Decide by Date:     17/12/01

Parish:     Amersham     Ward:     Amersham Common

App Type:     Full application

Applicant:      MR AND MRS G SHELTON

SITE CONSTRAINTS

Built-up area other than Local Plan Policy  H2 or H4

Unclassified road

Thames Water - groundwater protection zone

RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY

89/0802/CH: Two storey rear extension. Permitted and implemented.

THE APPLICATION

The application relates to the erection of a part two storey / part single storey side extension. The single storey extension would measure 12.8m deep, 3.5m wide and to a ridge height of 3.7m. The first floor extension would measure 2.9m deep, 1.7m wide and to a ridge height of 6.5m.

TOWN COUNCIL

Refuse on grounds of overbearing and out of keeping for site, inadequate parking provision.

POLICIES

The Adopted Chiltern District Local Plan - 1997 (including The Adopted Alterations May 2001): Policies GC1, GC2, GC3, H13, H14, H15, H16, TR11 and TR16.

ISSUES

1.     The application site is located within the built up area of Amersham.

2.     A distance in excess of 1m would be allowed up to the side boundary from the flank wall of the first floor extension. As the extension would be subordinate in height to the existing ridge and set back from the front elevation it is considered that no impact would be had upon the street scene. No objections raised in relation to Policies H13(ii) and H16.

3.     The scale, depth and height of the extension is considered acceptable as sufficient amenity space would be maintained and the amenities of the neighbouring property No12 would not be affected. No objections raised in relation to Policies GC1, GC3, H14 and H15.

4.     The site currently has provision to accommodate 3 vehicles. The proposal would involve demolishing the existing garage. The depth of the extension towards the front would also mean that another parking space would be lost, which would leave space for only one vehicle to be parked within the curtilage. As the gross floor area of the dwelling would exceed 120sq m, three spaces need to be provided within the curtilage. Compliance is not therefore achieved with Policies TR11 and TR16 and hence objection is raised thereto.

5.     The following recommendation is made having regard to the above and also to the content of the Human Rights Act 1998.

RECOMMENDATION: Refuse permission

For the following reasons

(1) Policy TR16 states that dwellings with a gross floor area of 120sq m or more should have a total of 3 parking spaces. The existing dwelling can accommodate 3 vehicles within the curtilage, however, the proposed development would reduce the amount of vehicles that the site could accommodate to 1 vehicle, which would is likely to lead to on-street parking, so causing danger and inconvenience to useres of the highway. As such, the proposal conflicts with Policies TR11 and TR16 of the Adopted Chiltern District Local Plan 1997 (including Adopted Alterations May 2001).

2001/1769/CH

Case Officer:      Iwan Jones

Date Received:     24/10/01     Decide by Date:     18/12/01

Parish:     Great Missenden - Prestwood     Ward:     Prestwood

App Type:     Full application

Applicant:      S SCOTT ESQ

SITE CONSTRAINTS

Green Belt other than GB4 or GB5 settlement

Within Chilterns Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty

adjoining Heritage Woodland

Unclassified road

Area of Special Advertisement Control

adjoining a SINC - NC1

adj Biological Notification site

RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY

AM/457/49: Conversion of barn to kitchen, larder, coal store. Permitted and implemented.

CH/1135/80: First floor extension. Permitted and implemented.

CH/26/81: Double garage with farm storage area and barn. Permitted.

CH/646/81: As CH/26/81. Permitted and implemented.

88/1273/CH: Two storey side extension. Permitted but not implemented.

88/1274/CH: As 88/1273/CH – LBC application. Conditional consent.

92/0094/CH: Part two storey, part single storey side extension. Refused.

92/0095/CH: As 92/0094/CH. Conditional consent.

92/0578/CH: Convert part of garage to residential annexe. Permitted and implemented.

92/0584/CH: Alterations and two storey side extension. Permitted and implemented.

92/0594/CH: As 92/0584/CH – LBC application. Conditional consent. Implemented.

97/1286/CH: Two storey extension. Withdrawn.

97/1287/CH: Two storey extension. Withdrawn.

THE APPLICATION

The application relates to the erection of a single storey extension to the north eastern corner of the dwelling measuring 6.1m wide, 4m deep and 3.6m high. All materials would match those of the existing. From planning records, it appears that the floorspace of the original house measured 200sq m. Further to extensions approved in 1949, 1980 and 1992, which have now been implemented an additional 107sq m of gross floor area has been added to the dwelling, and increase of 53.5% over and above the original floor area. The current proposal will add a further 24.4sq m, which together with the existing extensions represents an increase of 65.5% over the size of the original dwelling. These figures do not include the adjacent outbuildings or the two storey garage block extension, which is attached to the outbuildings and includes ancillary residential accommodation.

PARISH COUNCIL

No objections.

REPRESENTATIONS

Agent submits: Given the modest scale and discreet position of the extension the proposal has no effect upon the openness of the Green Belt which is the key test of Green Belt policy. In addition, the location of the house in a substantial curtilage at a distance from any other dwelling or public viewpoint means that there is no adverse effect upon any residential amenity or upon the wider landscape.

CONSULTATIONS

Historic Buildings Officer: It is proposed to extend the single storey range of outbuildings to the rear of the listed 17th –century house, linking in to a modern rear wing and filling in the corner between the outbuildings and a recent extension to the side of the wing. There will be a recessed link between this extension and the newly formed room in order to retain a visual separation between the two. There will be no structural impact on the listed range of the house and the new build will remain visually minor to it and distinct from it. No objections.

POLICIES

The Adopted Chiltern District Local Plan - 1997 (including The Adopted Alterations May 2001): Policies GC1, GC3, GB2, GB13, LSQ1, H14, H15, LB1, TR11 and TR16.  

ISSUES

1.     The application site is located in the open Green Belt where domestic extensions may be permissible providing that they are subordinate in size and scale to the original dwelling, are not intrusive in the landscape and maintain the openness of the Green Belt location. It is also located within the Chilterns Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty.

2.     The main issue for consideration therefore, is whether the proposed extension is acceptable in relation to Policy GB13 of the Adopted Chiltern District Local Plan 1997. The floorspace of the original dwelling measured 200sq m. This current proposal in addition to previously implemented permissions represents a cumulative floorspace increase of 65% over and above the original gross floor area of the dwelling. The proposed single storey extension represents an infill form of development within the existing envelope of the dwelling and would not be visually intrusive in the landscape. No objection is therefore raised in relation to Policy GB13.

3.     The extension would not be visible from any surrounding property. No objections raised in relation to Policies GC3 and H14.

4.     It is noted that the Historic Buildings Officer raises no objection to the proposal in relation to Policy LB1.

5.     No implications raised in relation to parking provision. No objections raised in relation to Policies TR11 and TR16.

6.     The following recommendation is made having regard to the above and also to the content of the Human Rights Act 1998.

RECOMMENDATION: Conditional permission

Subject to the following conditions

(1) C108 General Time Limit

(2) C431 Materials of Development to Match Those of Existing Building

(1) INFORMATIVE  You are advised that notwithstanding this planning permission, Listed Building Consent is also required before the development hereby permitted can be constructed.

2001/1773/CH

Case Officer:      Geoffrey Hugall

Date Received:     24/10/01     Decide by Date:     18/12/01

Parish:     Amersham     Ward:     Amersham the Hill

App Type:     Outline Application

Applicant:      A S ROGERS

SITE CONSTRAINTS

Established Residential Area of Special Character - Local Plan Policy H4

Unclassified road

Dwellings

Total New Dwellings - proposed:          1

Total Dwellings - displaced/demolished:     0

RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY

CH/1997/84     House and double garage, outline application approved.

THE APPLICATION

The application is a renewal of application 99/1751/CH, involving the erection of one dwelling with all matters reserved for subsequent consideration.

TOWN COUNCIL

Recommend approval.

POLICIES

The Adopted Chiltern District Local Plan - 1997 (including The Adopted Alterations May 2001): Policies GC1, GC3, H4, H12, TR11 & TR16.

ISSUES

1.     It is not considered that there have been any material changes in either the relevant planning policies or the site considerations.  No objection is therefore raised to the proposed renewal of the outline planning permission.

2.     The following recommendation is made having regard to the above and also to the content of the Human Rights Act 1998.

RECOMMENDATION: Conditional permission

Subject to the following conditions

(1) C101 Outline - All Matters Reserved

(2) C106 Outline Time Limit for Approval of Reserved Matters

(3) C107 Outline Time Limit

(4) C183 Site Dimensions

(5) C199 Garage/Parking Space (for one dwelling)- Plans To Be Approved

(6) C503 Access Layout - Adopted Rd : Access to New Dev - Plan to be App.

(7) Visibility splays of 1.5m by 1.5m shall be provided on both sides of the access hereby permitted before this access is first brought into use and shall be maintained thereafter.  Any new entrance gates shall be set back a minimum distance of 1.5m from the highway boundary.

Reason: To improve and maintain visibility between the highway andthe proposed access for the safety and convenience of pedestrians and vehiclular traffic.

(8) C165 Screen walls or fences on single site - 1.8 m. high on northern boundary

(9) C413 Landscaping - No Felling

(1) INFORMATIVE- In considering any application for the approval of reserved matters relating to this detached house, the Council will require that the position of the house, its spacing, frontage building line, size, design and external appearance accords with the prevailing character of other dwellings in the vicinity, within an Established Residential Area of Special Character, as shown on the Adopted Chiltern District Proposals Map.  In particular the detailed criteria set out in Policy H4 of the Adopted Chiltern District Local Plan will need to be fully complied with.  Should you require any assistance in this matter please contact Chiltern District Council's Planning Department.

(2) INFORMATIVE - I253 Need to obtain licence from Local Highway Authority to carry out work       

2001/1790/CH

Case Officer:      Jackie Emmett

Date Received:     29/10/01     Decide by Date:     23/12/01

Parish:     Penn     Ward:     Penn

App Type:     Full application

Applicant:      MR K HELLON

SITE CONSTRAINTS

Built-up area other than Local Plan Policy  H2 or H4

Unclassified road

Mineral Consultation Area

RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY

CH/1797/81. Conversion of garage into family room, addition of second garage and new front porch. Conditional permission.  Implemented.

99/1194/CH.  Rear Conservatory. Implemented.

THE APPLICATION

The application is for part first floor, part two storey, part single storey side/front extension. The ground floor extension is 1.7m in depth, 14.7m in width creating 24.99sqm of additional habitable floor area.

The first floor extension is 7.8m in depth 6.3m in width creating 49.14sqm of additional habitable floor area.

PARISH COUNCIL

No Comment

CONSULTATIONS

South Bucks District Council. No objection.

POLICIES

The Adopted Chiltern District Local Plan - 1997 (including The Adopted Alterations May 2001): Policies H11, H13, H14, H15, H16, TR11, and TR16.   

ISSUES

1. The application site is situated within a built up area excluded from the Green Belt. There are no objections in principle to the proposed development subject to compliance with relevant local plan policies.

2. Two windows are proposed on the south elevation of this extension and these would be partially visible from the neighbouring property on this side. It is not considered that they would significantly impact upon the amenities of the occupiers as the extension is situated some 18m from this property and screened by hedging.    

3.  The extension will not cause overlooking or overshadowing problems nor will it be overbearing with regard to any of the immediate neighbours. It has been designed to respect the design and proportions of the original house.

4. The proposal is 1.7m forward of the existing front elevation, however the front garden is 8.7m in depth and the extension would not appear intrusive within the street scene. Other properties along Howe Drive have similar alterations to this. This proposal is not out of keeping with the general aesthetic appearance of the area and it is considered the proposal would not have a negative impact on the street scene. There are no objections with regard to policies H11, H13, H14, H15 and H16.

5. There is sufficient room for the parking and manoeuvring of three cars on site. No objections are raised with regard to policies TR11 and TR16

6. The following recommendation is made having regard to the above and also to the content of the Human Rights Act 1998.

RECOMMENDATION: Conditional permission

Subject to the following conditions

(1) C108 General Time Limit

(2) C431 Materials of Development to Match Those of Existing Building

(3) C174 No additional windows in east elevation of extension

2001/1791/CH

Case Officer:      Kathryn York

Date Received:     29/10/01     Decide by Date:     23/12/01

Parish:     Little Missenden     Ward:     Little Missenden

App Type:     Full application

Applicant:      MR AND MRS GUINESS

SITE CONSTRAINTS

Little Missenden Conservation Area

Green Belt other than GB4 or GB5 settlement

Within Chilterns Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty

River Chess & River Misbourne - area liable to flood

Class C Road

Area of Special Advertisement Control

Affects setting of Grade II Listed Building

RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY

AM/371/53  Outline Application – House.  permitted.

AM/85/56  House.  permitted and implemented.

AM/804/56  Garage and fuel store.  Permitted and implemented.

AM/946/69  Extension to accommodate elderly parent.  Permitted – Not implemented.

01/0033/CH  Rear conservatory.  Permitted and implemented.

THE APPLICATION

Proposes a 1.8m high brick wall, extending for a distance of approximately 15m, on the western boundary of the site.

PARISH COUNCIL

Approve.

REPRESENTATIONS

One letter from occupier of Missenden House in support of the application.

CONSULTATIONS

District Historic Buildings Officer:

The proposed wall will consolidate the boundary between Missenden House (listed Grade II) and Toad Hall, one of two houses built in the former walled garden.  The original garden wall survives along the north boundary of Toad Hall.  The development therefore proposes a more permanent format for a boundary introduced within the curtilage of a listed building.

Ideally it would be preferable if the boundary were maintained in a softer landscaped form, so as to make the curtailment of the curtilage less visually decisive.  However, since the new boundary has been established since at least the 1950s, and may follow the line of an earlier one, it would seem that a long-term approach is perhaps inevitable here.  There are therefore no objections on historic building grounds as long as the materials used are sympathetic to the listed building and existing walls, but recognisable as an alteration to the original layout.  I would recommend a condition that samples should be approved in writing by the planning authority before work commences.

POLICIES

The Adopted Chiltern District Local Plan - 1997 (including The Adopted Alterations May 2001): Policies GC1, GC3, GB2, LSQ1, LB2, CA2.

ISSUES

1.     The application site is located within the Little Missenden Conservation Area, the open Green Belt and the Chilterns Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty.  Development must therefore seek to conserve or enhance the character and appearance of the Conservation Area, and must not be detrimental to the openness of the Green Belt location.  Furthermore, the proposal affects the setting of a Grade II Listed Building.

2.     The proposal comprises a relatively small section of wall, linking two existing sections of wall.  The levels of screening around the site mean that there will be no adverse impact on either the Conservation Area or the Chilterns Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty.  Furthermore, the proposed development will not have any impact on the residential amenities of the occupiers of adjoining properties.  No objections are raised in relation to Policies GC1, GC3, GB2, LSQ1, and CA2.

3.     There are no objections on historic building grounds as long as the materials used are sympathetic to the listed building and existing walls, but recognisable as an alteration to the original layout.  No objections are raised in terms of Policy LB1.

4.     The following recommendation is made having regard to the above and also to the content of the Human Rights Act 1998.

RECOMMENDATION: Conditional permission

Subject to the following conditions

(1) C108 General Time Limit

(2) Before any construction work commences, samples of the bricks to be used for the external construction of the development hereby permitted shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

Reason:  To ensure that the external appearance of the development is not detrimental to the character of the locality.

2001/1792/CH

Case Officer:      Iwan Jones

Date Received:     29/10/01     Decide by Date:     23/12/01

Parish:     Penn     Ward:     Penn

App Type:     Full application

Applicant:      MR AND MRS LEMON

SITE CONSTRAINTS

Built-up area other than Local Plan Policy  H2 or H4

Unclassified road

Mineral Consultation Area

RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY

AM/865/73: Sun lounge. Permitted and implemented.

01/0546/CH: Single storey front, side and rear extensions with dormer windows in rear roof space. Permitted.

01/1084/CH: Part two storey, part first floor rear extension, box dormer window in side elevation and extension of eaves line beneath. Refused – overlooking, loss of privacy to No.6.

THE APPLICATION

The application is a revision to application 2001/1084/CH which was refused. The revisions include inserting obscure glass below the transom in the bedroom window on the northwest elevation of the box dormer. This part of the window would also be fixed shut. A window would also be inserted in the north eastern elevation of the proposed dormer. Apart from these revisions the proposal remains the same as that of 2001/1084/CH which includes a part two storey / part first floor rear extension, a box dormer window in the north-west side elevation and an extension of the eaves line beneath part of it. The ground floor element of the rear extension is to measure 3.25m by 1.85m. The first floor element involves the creation of a dormer window with a flat roof, 5.45m above ground level on the northeast elevation.  The dormer window is to be 3m wide. The extension will create a new ridge height over that part of the building of 6m, 1.2m higher than the existing ridge. The box dormer window on the northwest elevation is to measure 8.8m by 2.4m with a flat roof, 5.45m above ground level. The extension to the eaves line is to measure 2.1m by 600mm and would create a level eaves line along the whole of the side elevation of the dwelling, 2.4m above ground floor level. The extension is to be supported by two brick piers, both 330mm by 225mm.

PARISH COUNCIL

No objection but wish to point out that new windows will overlook the neighbour’s garden.

POLICIES

The Adopted Chiltern District Local Plan - 1997 (including The Adopted Alterations May 2001): Policies GC1, GC2, GC3, H13, H14, H15, H18, TR11 and TR16.

ISSUES

1.     The application site is located within the built up area of Knotty Green where there are no objections to the proposed development in principle, subject to compliance with the relevant local plan policies.

2.     Inserting obscure glass into the most northerly bedroom window of the proposed box dormer would prevent any overlooking into the rear garden and private amenity area of the neighbouring property No.6 from occurring. The pane of glass that would be obscured  would be a minimum 1.8m up from floor level. This window would also be fixed shut. Although the transom panes would be cleared glazed, they would be of sufficient height to prevent the occupiers of the property from overlooking No.6. The other larger window of the box dormer would not overlook the neighbouring property due to its position and because the garage of No.6 is between this window and the rear garden and private amenity space of No.6. It is therefore considered that the proposed revisions would overcome the reason for refusal on application 01/1084/CH. No objections are therefore raised in relation to Policies GC3 and H14(iii).

3.     The following recommendation is made having regard to the above and also to the content of the Human Rights Act 1998.

RECOMMENDATION: Conditional permission

Subject to the following conditions

(1) C108 General Time Limit

(2) C431 Materials of Development to Match Those of Existing Building

(3) The  window of the proposed box dormer on the north western elevation shall be obscure glazed and fixed shut below the transom level, as shown on drawing number 3156B-5-2001 hereby approved, and shall thereafter remain as such.

Reason: To protect the amenities and privacy of the adjoining property.

(4) C176 Obscure glass in single window in north  eastern elevation

(5) C134 Single plan amended by plan (no 3156-5-2001) received on 7 December 2001.

2001/1802/CH

Case Officer:      Ray Martin

Date Received:     26/10/01     Decide by Date:     20/12/01

Parish:     Chesham     Ward:     Waterside

App Type:     Full application

Applicant:      UNIVERSAL CONSOLIDATED GROUP

SITE CONSTRAINTS

Employment Area for Business, Storage or Distribution

Class C Road

Eastern Gas pipeline

adj Archaeological Notification site

RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY

93/0016/CH Demolition of part of existing buildings, alterations to external appearance of buildings and alterations to and replacement of front boundary wall.  Permitted, but not implemented.

94/0112/CH Demolition of link building and erection of 2 storey extension on north elevation of southern building.  Permitted and implemented.

01/1139/CH Erection of covered link at first floor level.  Refused because no evidence to demonstrate that proposal would serve as a link, but rather would provide a fully enclosed area.  No additional parking provided leading to congestion and highway danger.

THE APPLICATION

Proposes the erection of a covered link at the rear of the site over an existing raised walkway linking the first floors of the 2 main buildings on the site.  Part of the link (68 sqm) is enclosed and part is open at the side (7sqm).  

TOWN COUNCIL

No objections.

REPRESENTATIONS

Occupier of adjoining residential property has written to indicate that he has no objection to this application.

Agent: The link is required by Sundance Multi Processor Technology Ltd who currently employ 30 people at the site, some in the building on the left hand side, some on the right. The scheme provides a fully covered link enabling the company to operate more effectively from the site.  It makes use of an otherwise useless part of the site and in doing so reinstates a building which existed in this location up until some nine years ago.  Moreover, the site has been surveyed and four additional marked parking spaces are shown. Notwithstanding this, it is contended that no additional traffic will be generated as the proposal provides a covered link rather than useable office space.

CONSULTATIONS

Transco: The Company has plant in the vicinity of this site, therefore if planning permission is granted the applicant should contact us to provide further details of the works proposed.

County Archaeologist: The scheme would be unlikely to have significant archaeological implications.

POLICIES

The Adopted Chiltern District Local Plan - 1997 (including The Adopted Alterations May 2001): Policies GC1, E3, TR11, TR16.

ISSUES

1.     The application site is allocated as a site for business and storage or distribution development in the Local Plan and accordingly there is no objection in principle to the proposal.

2.     The design of the proposed link is considered to be acceptable and will have little impact either on the streetscene or the general character of the area.  It abuts a large retaining wall at the rear as a consequence of which there is only one visible elevation.  No objections are raised to the design or visual/amenity impact of the proposed development.

3.     The scheme previously failed because the link increased floorspace creating a requirement for three additional parking spaces under the Council’s standards.  Although the applicant claimed that the enclosed area would not be used as lettable space and therefore would have no parking implications, this was not fully accepted.  The proposal did not show any internal link between the buildings and it appeared that a user would have to descend to ground level via an external stair before entering the building and no explanation was given why employees on this site would need to move from one building to the other.

4.     On this occasion, information has been provided clarifying the purpose of the link.  It is clear that a single company occupies part of both buildings and that first and second floor doors to the buildings would be directly accessible from the covered link without having to first descend to ground floor level.  This does not alter the possibility of the space being used as additional accommodation, but in this regard the submitted plans show four marked spaces on the site not previously provided.  Therefore, it is considered that the previous objections to the scheme have been overcome.

5.     The following recommendation is made having regard to the above and also to the content of the Human Rights Act 1998.

RECOMMENDATION: Conditional permission

Subject to the following conditions

(1) C108 General Time Limit

(2) C433 Materials - General Details

(3) The development hereby permitted shall not be brought into use until the parking spaces shown on drawing number 2187/9, received by the Local Planning Authority on 26/10/01, have been provided and marked out in accordance with the details on this plan.. Thereafter, these parking spaces shall be permanently reserved for parking purposes.

Reason: To ensure that adequate parking facilities are provided within the curtilage of the site and to avoid danger and inconvenience to highway users.

(1) INFORMATIVE  You are advised that Transco has plant in the vicinity of the site and that you should contact this company before commencing work on the development hereby permitted, (tel: 01733 866483).

2001/1807/CH

Case Officer:      Iwan Jones

Date Received:     29/10/01     Decide by Date:     23/12/01

Parish:     Cholesbury     Ward:     Cholesbury & The Lee

App Type:     Full application

Applicant:      MS P J TOMPSON

SITE CONSTRAINTS

Green Belt settlement GB4

Within Chilterns Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty

adjoining Common land

Class C Road

Area of Special Advertisement Control

Site within 250 m. of active or disused rubbish tip

THE APPLICATION

The application relates to the creation of a vehicular access and turning area. Its surface would be tarmacadam with gravel topping. The existing gate and fence would be removed with two parking spaces provided within the curtilage.

PARISH COUNCIL

No comment.

CONSULTATIONS

Corporate Services – Legal (common land) : The proposed new vehicular access to a road appears to affect a registered common. The applicant should be advised to seek consent from the owner of the land and consent may be required from the Secretary of State.

Head of Engineering (Highways) : No objections subject to conditions.

POLICIES

The Adopted Chiltern District Local Plan - 1997 (including The Adopted Alterations May 2001): Policies LSQ1, TR2 and TR3.

ISSUES

1.     The application site is located within the Green Belt settlement of Cholesbury and within the Chilterns Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty.

2.     There is already an access onto the area between Cholesbury Lane and the front gardens of  Sandpit Hill Cottages, where vehicles are being parked currently. The new drive would provide a better surface and would allow two vehicles to be parked within the front part of the curtilage of the dwelling. The turning area would allow vehicles to enter and leave the site in a forward gear. The Highways Officer’s comments are noted where no objection is raised to the proposal. No objections raised in relation to Policies TR2 and TR3.

3.     The following recommendation is made having regard to the above and also to the content of the Human Rights Act 1998.

RECOMMENDATION: Conditional permission

Subject to the following conditions

(1) C108 General Time Limit

(2) The development hereby permitted shall only be constructed in the materials specified on the plans hereby approved or in materials which shall previously have been approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

Reason : To ensure that the appearance of the development is not detrimental to the character of the locality.

(3) C501 Access Layout - Adopted Road : Access to new Dev - Plan Approved

(4) C561 Surface Water

(5) C571 Turning Space as on Plan Approved

(6) Prior to the commencement of the development hereby permitted a plan detailing the method of construction for the proposed access driveway which avoids the excavation of the ground adjacent to the roots of the tree adjacent to the west of the application site shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local planning Authority. Before the development is first brought into use the driveway shall be constructed and laid out in accordance with the approved plan.

Reason: In order to protect the roots of the tree adjacent to the line of the driveway.

(1) INFORMATIVE - I253 Need to obtain licence from Local Highway Authority to carry out work       

(2) INFORMATIVE You are advised that the proposed vehicular access appears to affect a registered common, and the consent of the owner of the land and possibly the Secretary of State will be required prior to commencement of work to implement this planning permission.

2001/1810/CH

Case Officer:      Jackie Emmett

Date Received:     30/10/01     Decide by Date:     24/12/01

Parish:     Great Missenden     Ward:     Ballinger & South Heath

App Type:     Full application

Applicant:      MR AND MRS I W HORN

SITE CONSTRAINTS

Green Belt settlement GB5

Within Chilterns Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty

Class C Road

Area of Special Advertisement Control

RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY

91/0017/CH. Two storey side/rear extension. Implemented.

THE APPLICATION

Proposes a single storey side/front extension incorporating double garage. The side extension has an overall depth of 14m, and decreases in width at the side of the property from 3m to 5.6m at the front of the existing dwelling. That part of the extension adjacent to the flank wall of the house has a mono pitch roof 4.5m in height.  Where the extension projects in front of the dwelling the height is 4m. Attached to this front extension is a double garage, 6.5m by 6.2m wide, with a pitched roof 4.5m high. The overall depth of the development adjacent to the side boundary is therefore 20.5m.

PARISH COUNCIL

Noobjections.

REPRESENTATIONS

Letter received from occupier of  Crossgates Ballinger road – No objection.

Letter received from occupier of Wychwood, Ballinger Road – Objection for the following reasons:

1.The bulk of the extension is unacceptable and could set a precedent. It is also forward of the building line and will affect existing village rural/suburban aspect.  

2.The extension will extend upwards to the eaves of the existing property and create an extensive blocking of light.

3.The overall mass of the property will nearly double in size from the original house.   

4. Loss of value of property.

POLICIES

The Adopted Chiltern District Local Plan - 1997 (including The Adopted Alterations May 2001): Policies GB5, GB12, H13, H14, H15, TR11 and TR16.

ISSUES

1. The application is located within the Green Belt Settlement of South Heath where domestic extensions are acceptable in principle under the terms of Policy GB5 of the Adopted Chiltern District Local Plan.

2. Although this proposal would not cause overlooking to neighbouring properties, the length, height and bulk of the proposal extending along to the east side boundary will be overbearing and visually intrusive to the neighbouring property of  ‘Wychwood’.  

3. With regard to the fact that there is substantial screening along the frontage of the site, the proposal extending 9.4m in front of the existing front wall of Applewood, would not appear visually intrusive when viewed from Ballinger Road.

4. The proposal is not contrary to policies TR11 & TR16 as there is sufficient room for three cars to park and manoeuvre on site.   

5. The following recommendation is made having regard to the above and also to the content of the Human Rights Act 1998.

RECOMMENDATION: Refuse permission

For the following reasons

(1) The proposed extension, by reason of its length, height, bulk and close proximity to the boundary of the neighbouring dwelling, Wychwood, will appear overbearing and visually intrusive when viewed from this  property.  As such the proposal will be detrimental to the residential amenities of the occupiers of Wychwood and is contrary to Policies GC3, H13 and H14 of the Adopted Chiltern District Local Plan, 1997 (Including Adopted Alterations May 2001).

2001/1811/CH

Case Officer:      Ray Martin

Date Received:     30/10/01     Decide by Date:     24/12/01

Parish:     Great Missenden     Ward:     Great Missenden

App Type:     Full application

Applicant:      MR AND MRS TAVERNOR

SITE CONSTRAINTS

Green Belt other than GB4 or GB5 settlement

Within Chilterns Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty

Class C Road

Area of Special Advertisement Control

RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY

AM/1160/61  Alterations and additions.  Permitted and implemented.

CH/27/76  Two storey side extension and garage.  Refused because of detrimental impact on Green Belt and precedent.

THE APPLICATION

Proposal comprises the conversion of an existing single storey wing to the dwelling, which currently comprises garaging, to an annex and incorporates the retention of a dummy pitched roof added to the original flat roof.  The elevation fronting the drive is altered by the insertion of two windows where garage doors presently exist and the rear elevation is altered by inserting patio doors in place of an existing window.

PARISH COUNCIL

No objections.

POLICIES

The Adopted Chiltern District Local Plan - 1997 (including The Adopted Alterations May 2001): Policies GC1, GC3, GB13, LSQ1, TR11, TR16.

ISSUES

1.     The proposed alterations to this property do not add to the built development on this site and thus are not considered to have any detrimental impact on the openness of the Green Belt.  The dummy pitched roof replacing a flat roof represents a modest improvement to the appearance of the building and accordingly, it is not considered that the proposal would be visually intrusive in the landscape.

2.     The creation of an annex within an existing part of the building, with an internal link to the remainder of the accommodation is considered acceptable provided it remains ancillary to the main dwelling.

3.     New windows created to habitable accommodation in the annex would not result in the overlooking of any neighbouring properties.

4.     The loss of garaging is not objectionable given that more than adequate space exists on the driveway of this property to meet the Council’s car parking standards.

5.     The following recommendation is made having regard to the above and also to the content of the Human Rights Act 1998.

RECOMMENDATION: Conditional permission

Subject to the following conditions

(1) C108 General Time Limit

(2) C431 Materials of Development to Match Those of Existing Building

(3) The annex hereby permitted shall only be occupied as part of the existing dwelling on the site and shall at no time be occupied as an independent dwelling unit.

Reason: The establishment of an independent dwelling unit within the curtilage of the main dwelling would lead to an intensification in the use of the site which would be out of keeping with and detrimental to the character of its surroundings.

2001/1812/CH

Case Officer:      Kathryn York

Date Received:     30/10/01     Decide by Date:     24/12/01

Parish:     Great Missenden - Prestwood     Ward:     Prestwood

App Type:     Full application

Applicant:      MR AND MRS M SYMONS

SITE CONSTRAINTS

Green Belt settlement GB4

Within Chilterns Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty

Class A Road

Area of Special Advertisement Control

adj Biological Notification site

RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY

87/0927/CH  Carport, parking area and new access onto Perks Lane.  Permitted and implemented.

89/0623/CH  Single storey front extension.  Permitted development.

THE APPLICATION

Proposes two storey side extension measuring 5.4m wide by a maximum of 6.7m deep, with a pitched roof the height of the existing roof.  The application also proposes a front dormer window of an identical size and height to the existing front dormer window.

PARISH COUNCIL

No objections.

POLICIES

The Adopted Chiltern District Local Plan - 1997 (including The Adopted Alterations May 2001): Policies GC1, GC3, GB2, GB12, LSQ1, H11, H13, H14, H15, H16, H18, TR11 and TR16.

ISSUES

1.     The application site is located within both a Row of Dwellings in the Green Belt and the Chilterns Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty, where there are no objections to the proposed development in principle subject to compliance with the relevant local plan policies.

2.     The proposed extension is sited approximately 3m from the side boundary of the site, and is a sufficient distance away from the neighbouring properties so as not to adversely effect the residential amenities of these properties.

3.     The proposed extension is located on the site of an existing carport, and will not be detrimental to either the street scene or the Chilterns Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty.  No objections are raised in this respect.

4.     The dormer window is suitably small scale and subordinate to the roof slope in which it is to be inserted.  No objections are raised in terms of Policy H18.

5.     Although the development results in the loss of the carport, there is adequate parking space within the curtilage of the site.  No objections are raised in relation to Policies TR11 and TR16.

6.     The following recommendation is made having regard to the above and also to the content of the Human Rights Act 1998.

RECOMMENDATION: Conditional permission

Subject to the following conditions

(1) C108 General Time Limit

(2) C431 Materials of Development to Match Those of Existing Building

2001/1820/CH

Case Officer:      Kathryn York

Date Received:     30/10/01     Decide by Date:     24/12/01

Parish:     Chesham     Ward:     St Marys

App Type:     Application under Advertisement Regulations

Applicant:      SAINSBURY'S SUPERMARKETS LTD

SITE CONSTRAINTS

Chesham Conservation Area

Shopping Area-not PSF-Proposed Alterations S1(delete Prestwood East)

Area for Safeguarding Retail Use - Chesham S6 - Proposed Alts - deleted

Proposed public car park - Chesham

Class A Road

Unclassified road

Affects setting of Grade II Listed Building

RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY

97/1723/CH  Demolition of existing buildings and erection of replacement foodstore and new detached building with retail at ground floor and offices over together with car park, trolley shelters, lighting columns, altered access and landscaping.  Conditional permission.

98/0848/CH  Demolition of existing buildings and erection of replacement foodstore and new detached building with retail at ground floor and offices over together with car park, trolley shelters, lighting columns, altered access with new access from St. Mary’s Way and landscaping.  Conditional permission.

98/1785/CH  4 externally illuminated and 1 internally illuminated shop signs and non-illuminated car park signs.  Refused: Sign 1 is considered to be detrimental to public safety.  The sign is considered confusing in terms of the information it provides, and is therefore considered to constitute an unnecessary distraction to motorists using St. Mary’s Way, to the detriment of public safety and resulting in unnecessary clutter in the street scene.

99/0022/CH  Erection of two lighting columns each with store name.  Permitted and implemented.

99/0067/CH  4 externally illuminated and 1 internally illuminated shop signs and non-illuminated car park/entrance signs (including wall mounted signs).  Permitted and implemented.

01/1819/CH  Installation of covered double trolley bay.  Not yet determined.

01/1821/CH  One internally illuminated sign, 4 externally illuminated signs and 2 non-illuminated wall mounted signs.  Not yet determined.

THE APPLICATION

The application seeks advertisement consent for the following new, relocated and replacement signs:

New signs:

Sign Type 3a:     Four non-illuminated banners sited at intervals of between 14.5m and 15m along the western side of Elgiva Lane.  The banners measure 0.95m x 2.9m , and are mounted on 6m high posts.

Sign Type 5:     Wall mounted pick up point sign adjacent to the store entrance and pick up area, measuring 0.6m x 0.6m.

Sign Type 7:     Double sided wall mounted circular ATM button with a diameter of 0.4m, located on the south elevation between Sign Type 5 and the store entrance

Sign Type 8:     Totem sign measuring 3.2m x 1.65m, with a depth of 0.2m.  The sign is located on the site of an existing direction sign on the corner of the car park entrance on the eastern side of Elgiva Lane.

Sign Type 9:     0.6m wide direction sign mounted on two pillars at maximum height of 2.2m, with an length of 1.55m.  The sign is located in the car park between Elgiva Lane and the store entrance.

Sign Type 10:     0.6m wide pedestrian crossing sign mounted on two pillars at maximum height of 2.2m, with a length of 0.6m.  The sign is sited adjacent to the pedestrian crossing at the northern end of Elgiva Lane.

Relocated signs:

Sign Types 1 and 2:     Disabled parking and mother and child signs will be re-sited so as to be back to back facing the relevant parking spaces  at the front of the car park facing the store.

Sign Type 4:     Relocation of fire barrier approximately 29m further north along the High Street.

Sign Type 6:     Information sign currently sited at car park entrance on eastern side of Elgiva Lane to be moved to car park entrance on western side of Elgiva Lane.

Replacement signs:

Sign Type 3b:     Street lamp signs are to be replaced, with the only alteration being to the lettering which is in upper and lower case as opposed to solely upper case.

TOWN COUNCIL

Recommend Approval.

REPRESENTATIONS

Agent:

The proposed advertisements represent part of the proposed improvements of the Sainsbury' store, in order to bring it up to current Sainsbury’s standard.  The proposed signs have been designed to update and complement the appearance of the store, and in most cases represent a direct replacement of existing signage within the car park and to the store.  All of the signs will be seen together in the context of an established Sainsburys car park and will not appear out of place.

The proposed advertisements are acceptable in the context of government advice contained in PPG19 “Outdoor Advertisements and Control”.  PPG19 acknowledges in paragraph 3 that outdoor advertising is essential to commercial activity in a free and diverse economy.

Paragraph 4 states that the appearance of the building can be spoilt by insensitively placed or poorly designed signs and that, in a number of cases, advertisements appear to be an afterthought and can appear to be brash, over-dominant or incongruous.  It is our view that the advertisements complement the building and its commercial setting and help to update the appearance of the store.

Paragraph 6 of PPG19 deals with corporate images and states that, although some corporate designs may be unsuitable in particularly sensitive areas, corporate designs should not be refused elsewhere simply because a Planning Authority dislikes such a design.

Paragraph 9 and 10 confirm that the display of outdoor advertisements can only be controlled in the interests of amenity and public safety.  Paragraph 10 goes on to state that “the control system is concerned with the visual effect on its surrounding of an advertisement.”

Paragraphs 11-14 of PPG19 fall under the heading of “Consideration of Amenity”.  Paragraph 11 makes it clear that an assessment of an advertisement’s impact on amenity should have regard to its effect on the appearance of the building itself and also on the visual amenity in the immediate neighbourhood.  It states: “The relevant considerations for this purpose are the local characteristics of the neighbourhood, including scenic, historic, architectural or cultural features which contribute to the distinctive character of the locality.”

It is our view that the proposed advertisements fully accord with the advice of PPG19 and advertisement consent can be granted in the knowledge that the proposal will not result in any harm to amenity considerations. In our view, the proposal is totally acceptable and will not result in any harm to either amenity or public safety issues.

CONSULTATIONS

District Historic Buildings Officer: No objections.

Bucks County Council – Highways Development Control: No objections.

POLICIES

The Adopted Chiltern District Local Plan - 1997 (including The Adopted Alterations May 2001): Policies GC1, GC3, CA1, CA2, A1, LB2

ISSUES

1.     The application site comprises a commercial premises with a number of illuminated and non-illuminated advertisements both on the building itself and within the carpark.  The site is located within the shopping area of Chesham, and lies partly within the Chesham Conservation Area.  In accordance with the requirements of Policy A1, the display of advertisements may be acceptable provided the sign is well positioned in relation to the building or site, is of an appropriate size, colour and design which is not detrimental to the character of the locality, and does not adversely affect either the amenities of local residents or public safety.

2.     The new signs are located either within the car park, or wall mounted on the elevation of the store facing the car park.  With the exception of the four proposed banners, all the signs are unobtrusive and are unlikely to adversely affect the residential amenities of local residents.

3.     The four new banners located along Elgiva Lane will be visible on approach to the parking area.  However, there are no other signs along this footpath, and no other banners of this size in any part of the car park.  It is therefore not considered that the banners result in visual clutter in the street scene, and nor will they affect the residential amenities of local residents.

4.     The impact of the relocated and replacement signs is unlikely to be any worse than existing, and therefore no objections are raised in this respect.

5.     There are no implications for highway safety and therefore no objections are raised in this respect.

6.     The following recommendation is made having regard to the above and also to the content of the Human Rights Act 1998.

RECOMMENDATION: Conditional consent

Subject to the following conditions

(1) C118 5 Year Limited Period - Adverts

(2) C261 Standard Advert Conditions

(3) The signs hereby permitted shall only be constructed in the materials specified on the plans hereby approved or in materials which shall previously have been approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

Reason : To ensure that the external appearance of the signage is not detrimental to the character of the locality.

2001/1821/CH

Case Officer:      Kathryn York

Date Received:     30/10/01     Decide by Date:     24/12/01

Parish:     Chesham     Ward:     St Marys

App Type:     Application under Advertisement Regulations

Applicant:      SAINSBURY'S SUPERMARKETS LTD

SITE CONSTRAINTS

Chesham Conservation Area

Shopping Area-not PSF-Proposed Alterations S1(delete Prestwood East)